asset mapping: a course assignment and community assessment

Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company

New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development

25 (3), 125-129

Perspectives in Adult Education—Asset mapping: A course assignment and community assessment

Mary Crozier1

Florence Melchior2

1East Carolina University, 2Medicine Hat College Corresponding Author: Mary Crozier, East Carolina University, Department of Addictions and Rehabilitation Studies, College of Allied Health Scienc-es, Greenville, North Carolina, 27858, USA E-mail: [email protected]

Assessing needs, prioritizing risk and protective factors, planning for new initiatives, and using evidence based pro-grams can be challenging to new substance abuse prevention coalitions and to substance abuse prevention students, both of whom have a tendency to rush to action without sound planning. The “ready, fire, aim” approach runs coun-ter to the “ready, aim, fire” approach of assessment followed by planning. Therefore, faculty teaching a substance abuse prevention course in a community with a new substance abuse prevention coalition decided to assign students asset mapping of the community and share the results with the new coalition. This experiential learning process of integrating theory into practice was designed to build expertise in the field and inform the practice of substance abuse prevention through theory (Hogan, Gabrielsen, Luna, & Grothaus, 2003). As an in vivo research assignment, asset mapping deepened students understanding of community assessment and planning.

Abstract Asset mapping is a relatively new data collection strategy to identify services, staff capacity, programs, resources, values, and other protective factors in a geographic area that can be juxtaposed to risk factors when initiating com-munity planning. A substance abuse prevention course for undergraduates added an assignment of assessing com-munity needs using asset mapping. When completed, the asset map was shared with the off-campus substance abuse prevention coalition which allowed students the experience of consulting while bridging theory and practice. The purpose of this article is to outline the process and benefits for infusing a community assignment, asset mapping, into substance abuse prevention course content. Keywords Asset map, community assessment, substance abuse prevention

New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25 (3) 126

Asset maps are detailed descriptions of services, resources, trained professionals, community capacity (Berkowitz & Wadud, 2006), and facilities within a certain geographic area that can serve as protective factors to mitigate sub-stance abuse risk factors in the given area. The notion of surveying assets as part of a primary data collection pro-cess (Plescia, Koontz, & Laurent, 2001) is relatively new to community planning efforts (Gandelman, DeSantis, & Rietmeijer, 2006). Organized as a list, survey, or topographic cartograph, an asset map includes a comprehensive inventory of associations, programs, services, financial resources, government and faith-based institutions, formal and informal organizations, equipment, training opportunities, relationships and networks, professional and lay skills, shared infrastructure, unique events, and geographic landmarks that can serve as assets and protective factors (Beaulieu, 2002; Hogan et al., 2003). Assets describe community traditions, traits, values, strengths, and amenities worth sustaining (Fuller, Guy, & Pletsch, 2002). Completed asset maps have been used to illustrate the exact loca-tion of facilities, services, and meeting rooms when planning new health care delivery systems (Plescia et al.) and the map can be laid atop a road map to form a topographical-like map of protective factors. Knowing a communities history, risks, needs, and protective factors is vital for planning effective prevention initia-tives. Current data is necessary for an accurate picture of community needs, gaps, past efforts, investments, redun-dancies, resources, and capacities. “Community asset mapping can offer additional information about community resources and typically involve participatory approaches to program development and implementation” (Mathie & Cunningham, 2002, cited in Gandelman et al. 2006, p. 34). Data from asset mapping can also be used in a “community report card” as an indicator of performance measurements, program delivery, and community service utilization (Simmes, Blaszcak, Kurtin, Bowen, & Ross, 2000). A substance abuse prevention course was assigned the task of developing an asset map. The course was composed of 15 undergraduate students, all female, ranging in age from 19 to 28. It was a required course for substance abuse majors in their last semester of a university transfer addictions counseling program. Each student was asked to conduct structured interviews with at least six off-campus community leaders, agency service providers, or busi-ness professionals. Students were to tabulate the data from these interviews into an asset map. The students’ asset maps were combined into a report for the geographic area served by the off-campus substance abuse prevention coalition, to bring added information to service providers who were planning new prevention initiatives (Plescia, et al., 2001). Two theoretical paradigms served as the framework for asset mapping. The first was the skilled-helper model (Egan, 2002) and the second was prevention program planning model (Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992). The basic techniques of the skilled-helper model, which can be used for interviewing as in the case of the asset map assignment, include attentive body language, nonverbal prompts, empathetic listening, probing questions, summa-rizing statements, and information sharing. The emphasis in this course was on Egan’s first stage, understanding “what’s going on” (Egan, p. 26). The students role-played these basic techniques in the classroom before inter-viewing actual citizens for the asset map. The prevention program planning model (Hawkins et al.) provided the organization, sequence, rationale, and foundation for the community interviews. Prevention program planning in-cludes seven steps:

1. assess the readiness of the community and mobilize the community to take action, 2. assess the levels of risk factors and protective factors in the community, 3. translate the risk and protective factor data into priorities, 4. examine the resources in the community that are reducing the priority risk factors and in-

creasing protective factors, 5. select a target population, 6. apply best practices and guiding principles, and 7. evaluate the prevention program or strategy implemented (Hogan et al., 2003, p.42).

Students were introduced to an asset map completed by the Historic Triangle Substance Abuse Coalition (2002). They adapted it with permission and developed their interview questions. Changes were made to reflect different


geographic, demographic, and course needs. Areas addressed by students when interviewing professionals for the asset map included:

1. the name of interviewee and his/her position, 2. the name of the agency/school/program/business including contact information (phone, ad-

dress, website, and email) with a general description, 3. a detailed list of services offered by the agency/school/ program/business, 4. a list of identified gaps in services and consumer needs, 5. any overlaps or duplication in services, 6. the results of the most recent consumer satisfaction survey or client/customer post assess-

ment, 7. any recent changes or adaptations and rationale for making them, and 8. a visual scan of the site including availability of substance abuse related pamphlets, posters,

and policies.

The next step was to determine which community professionals should be interviewed for the asset map. Local telephone books, government publications, agency web sites, as well as neighborhood directories were brought to class for review. From these sources a list was made of the various government offices, municipal programs, hu-man service agencies, faith-based programs, businesses, schools and other educational services, volunteer organi-zations, service clubs, and recreational outlets that could serve as protective factors for the identified community. This list was then sorted by domain (Hogan et al., 2003) and similarity into six categories: community human ser-vice agencies, family mental and physical health related services, individual fitness and recreational services, schools and educational services, youth social agencies, and private businesses and government agencies. Each category was put into a separate envelope from which the students had to randomly draw a slip of paper.

Students had to conduct structured interviews with a professional from each of the six categories. Students then summarize the data for the asset map and wrote a reflective paper. Grades were based on: timeliness in conducting the interviews; description of the interview process; breadth and depth of collected data; identification of the sub-stance abuse prevention population, such as universal, selective, or indicated; details about the agency, school, pro-gram, or business; description of professional education or prevention capacity; identification of needs or gaps in ser-vices and similarities and differences between agencies; and writing format.

This asset map assignment helped students recognize the need for community data collection prior to implementing prevention services. Students began to understand that data collection can reveal critical population needs and re-sources that can be used to implement evidence based interventions (Center for Substance Abuse Prevention ¶1, 2007). The students also learned that data collection can allow service providers and future service providers to “start where the people are” (Minkler & Hancock, 2003, p. 136) by asking open-ended questions and “honoring the…plain talk” of citizens (Minkler & Hancock, p. 137). This “pinpointing of needed services” (Muraskin, 1993, p. 4) with a current appraisal of resources helps to prevent the “ready, fire, aim” reaction.

Students learned to distinguish the traditional needs based assessment from the asset based assessment. A needs based assessment describes deficiencies, problems, pathologies, and community concerns that need fixing whereas an asset based assessment describes individuals, resources, events, programs, and relationships that can enhance the community (Goldman & Schmalz, 2007; Minkler & Hancock, 2003). Also, needs based assessments tend to build dependence between the community and service providers, whereas asset based assessments build interde-pendence while empowering citizens (Beaulieu, 2002).

At the end of the semester, students’ data was synthesized into a comprehensive asset map for the substance abuse prevention coalition. It included city services, community resources, mental and physical health programs, recrea-tional opportunities, existing prevention efforts, linkages between services, educational capacity of professionals offering substance abuse services, and anticipated needs.


Students learned a new data collection strategy and the need to collect current information about the community prior to developing prevention services. The two theoretical paradigms used for this assignment, the skilled-helper model (Egan, 2002) and the prevention program planning model (Hawkins et al., 1992), were beneficial for the structured interviews of community professionals and the development of the asset maps. This experiential learn-ing opportunity provided a community context for students to better understand service delivery, problem-solving, and ways to apply theory to practice (Fiore, Metcalf, & McDaniel, 2007).

When reflecting on the data, students reported mixed feelings. They were pleased with their reception by profes-sionals in the community however they found the professionals to be very serious, busy, and over worked. Stu-dents expressed increased empathy for clients who need services and who need to schedule appointments with these busy service providers. Students were concerned about the lack of funding, inconsistent standards for sub-stance abuse training by service providers, time constraints on service providers, and substance abuse program lim-itations. They noted a lack of understanding about substance abuse needs which may have contributed to the small number of substance abuse programs being offered.

There were many benefits from using a community assessment for a classroom assignment. Students saw theory put directly into practice which helped to instill an enthusiasm for research (Yalisove, 2004). The asset mapping method provided rich data and an ease of implementation while providing students with ample experience.

Students reveled in the attention from the college, the media, and the community. This assignment also buoyed students’ level of self-efficacy and excitement about upcoming practicum experiences. They expressed satisfaction in assisting the newly formed, off-campus substance abuse prevention coalition with current data.

This type of assignment has the potential to be a win/win situation for students, off-campus coalitions, and faculty. It is anticipated that students will use the “ready, aim, fire” approach in future assessments and community preven-tion planning initiatives. This positive exposure to and experience with an emerging data collection strategy can inform the future practice of students as they search for best practices (Yalisove, 2004). References

Beaulieu, L. (2002). Mapping the assets of your community: A key component for building local capacity. Re-

trieved from Mississippi State, Southern Rural Development Center site: http://srdc.msstate.edu/publications/227/227_asset_mapping.pdf

Berkowitz, B. & Wadud, E. (2006). Questions to ask while capacity mapping. Retrieved from University of Kan-

sas, Community Tool Box: http://ctb.ku.edu/en/tablecontents/sub_section_tools_1043.htm#tools2 Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (2007). Assessment. Retrieved from http://prevention.samhsa.gov/

assessment Egan, G. (2002). The skilled helper: A problem-management and opportunity-development approach to helping

(7th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. Fiore, S., Metcalf, D. & McDaniel, R. (2007). Theoretical foundations of experiential learning. In Silberman, M

(Ed.) The handbook of experiential learning (pp. 33-58). San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Fuller, T., Guy, D., & Pletsch, C. (2002). Asset mapping: A handbook (AAFC Publication No.:2148/E. Retrieved

from Canadian Rural Partnership site: http://www.rural.gc.ca/conference/documents/mapping_e.phtml


Gandelman, A., DeSantis, L., & Rietmeijer, C. (2006). Assessing community needs and Agency capacity-An inte-gral part of implementing effective evidence-based interventions. AIDS Education and Prevention, 18, Supplement A; The Guilford Press, 32-43.

Goldman, K., & Schmalz, K. (2005). Accentuate the positive!: Using an asset-mapping tool as part of a community

-health needs assessment. Health Promotion Practice, 6(125). Retrieved October 10, 2007 from http://hpp.sagepub.com

Hawkins, D., Catalano, R., & Miller, J. (1992). Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in

adolescence and early childhood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin, 112(2), 64-105.

Historic Triangle Substance Abuse Coalition. (2002). [Asset map]. Unpublished raw data. Hogan, J., Gabrielsen, K., Luna, N., & Grothaus, D. (2003). Substance abuse prevention: The intersection of sci-

ence and practice. Toronto: Pearson Education. Minkler, M., & Hancock, T. (2003). Community-driven asset identification and issue selection. In M. Minkler &

N. Wallerstein (Eds.), Community based participatory research for health (133-154). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Muraskin, L. (1993). Understanding evaluation: The way to better prevention programs. Department of Education.

Rockville, MD: Westat. Plescia, M., Koontz, S., & Laurent, S. (2001). Community assessment in a vertically integrated healthcare system.

American Journal of Public Health, 91(5), 811-814. Simmes, D., Blaszcak, M., Kurtin, P., Bowen, N., & Ross, R. (2000). Creating a community report card: The San

Diego experience. American Journal of Public Health, 90(6), 880-882. Yalisove, D. (2004). Considerations in the development of a research to practice curriculum for alcoholism and

substance abuse counselors. Journal of teaching in the addictions 3(2), 77-93.

asset mapping: a course assignment and community assessment

Documents